First, let’s address a basic but widely overlooked fact  –  never mistake Bangladesh for a homogeneous, monolithic society. Much like its neighbor India, Bangladesh is layered, diverse, and politically complex. Religion, language, dialect, and political ideology don’t exist in binary forms here; rather, they overlap, clash, and co-exist in often paradoxical ways.

Yet, in the current political climate, the loudest voices coming from Bangladesh, whether on television panels, social media platforms, or diplomatic corridors, seem to carry a distinctly anti-India tone. But should we allow this dominant voice to blind us to the subtler truths beneath? Absolutely not. Because beneath this cacophony lie many pro-India voices, still present, still concerned, and still trying to reason. The tragedy is, they are being systematically silenced.

And this silencing, it appears, isn’t a byproduct of organic public sentiment, but a calculated political strategy.

Which brings us to a crucial and controversial question:- Why is Muhammad Yunus, once hailed as a savior of the poor, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, seemingly aiding and abetting this silencing?

To answer that, we must look beyond just the headlines and look deeper into the political messaging at play. The destruction of Hindu temples, the persecution of Bangladeshi Hindus, the abductions, the mob violence, these are not isolated acts of communal frenzy.

They are increasingly being seen as tools of signaling. Signaling to India, and to the world, that Bangladesh is pivoting. Away from a secular-democratic leaning, towards a more radical, authoritarian one, led by figures like Yunus and allegedly bolstered by groups such as Jamaat-e-Islami.

One may ask. why Hindus? Why target this already vulnerable minority?

Because in the politics of polarization, minorities become the canvas on which majoritarian agendas are painted, and the pain of one community becomes a lever to provoke another. What we are witnessing in Bangladesh today is not just domestic upheaval, it’s geopolitical game, playing out on the fragile backs of minorities.

So how did a microfinance icon become a geopolitical actor accused of endangering regional ties?

Because power, once tasted, reshapes many stories. And since being ushered into the highest office (allegedly with quiet backing from external sympathizers and ideological allies) Yunus appears to be rewriting Bangladesh’s long-standing diplomatic posture.

A large part of this rewriting is focused on India.

A Calculated Shift in Allegiance?
The façade cracked during Yunus’s visit to China, a trip that sent more than a few diplomatic eyebrows arching in New Delhi. It wasn’t just the optics of cozy handshakes and glowing statements about “deepening strategic ties” that drew attention. What truly sent shockwaves was his barely veiled reference to India’s northeastern states – the ‘Seven Sisters’.

Addressing a discussion in Beijing on March 28, Yunus had tried to convince Chinese businesses to set up industries in Bangladesh and export to the rest of the world and even China by taking advantage of the country’s seaway.

“Seven Sisters of India are a landlocked region — they have no way to reach the ocean. We are the only guardian of the ocean for all of this region. This opens up a huge possibility,” he told the roundtable.

To call it a diplomatic blunder would be too generous. It was a bold, deliberate provocation  – one that many in Indian strategic circles view as a red flag, signalling a drastic shift in Bangladesh’s geopolitical orientation.

And what followed didn’t help. In March 2025, Bangladesh abruptly halted yarn imports from India via land ports, a move that baffled trade experts and enraged Bangladesh’s own business chambers. The textile industry( the very backbone of Bangladesh’s economy) depends on Indian raw materials. Indian ports also serve as essential trade routes to ship Bangladeshi finished goods globally.

Why, then, would Yunus bite the very hand that fuels his country’s most vital export sector?

The answer lies not in economics but in political symbolism.

By favouring Pakistani yarn imports, costlier and logistically burdensome, over Indian ones, Yunus is not strengthening Bangladesh’s economy. He’s sending a message. A message that old alliances can be undone, that Bangladesh can pivot eastward – toward Beijing –  and even flirt with Islamabad, however impractical that may seem.

India, for its part, responded swiftly. The Modi government revoked a key transshipment facility for Bangladesh, sparing only Bhutan and Nepal. For a landlocked country that heavily depends on Indian logistical corridors, this move was both strategic and surgical.

But again — what leader willingly risks their own country’s economic stability just to provoke a neighbor?

Unless that very provocation is part of a larger agenda — an agenda that involves re-aligning Bangladesh away from India’s orbit, and into a new ideological and economic axis, possibly backed by powerful benefactors in Beijing and Riyadh.

And this is where the questions get darker.

From Hasina’s Balance to Yunus’s Tilt
Until Sheikh Hasina was at the helm, India never had to second-guess Bangladesh’s loyalty in matters of national security. Even when the terrain got rough, the underlying diplomatic spine between the two countries held. India, for its part, invested heavily not just in diplomacy, but in business too. Consider Adani Power, one of India’s largest private enterprises, was awarded a major electricity supply contract to power the cities of Bangladesh.

Now comes the twist. Enter Mohammed Yunus and the equilibrium vanishes.

The moment Yunus steps in, the very first tremors are felt not in speeches, but in trade. Imports from India are halted. Business with Adani is put under review. More crucially, Jamaat-e-Islami constituencies suddenly seem emboldened, as if waiting for a signal and Yunus just gave it.

Let’s not forget – Jamaat-e-Islami isn’t just a Bangladeshi force. It’s a shared thread linking radical Islamist groups across India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. But of the three, its roots run deepest in Bangladesh.

So what message was Yunus really sending when he publicly challenged India’s position? Why stir the hornet’s nest?

Perhaps the answer lies in his backchannel connections, particularly with the Pakistani Army and the ISI. The ideological transmission line, the one that keeps these regimes talking in hushed tones and coded gestures, is Jamaat-e-Islami. In this matrix, Yunus  becomes the conduit. A tool being calibrated for a larger endgame.

And the timing is everything.

Let’s not forget, Yunus is not an elected leader. His presence at the top of the Bangladeshi power structure was pitched as temporary, a bridge until elections were held. That was the promise. That was the premise.

But elections? Now branded a “waste of time” by Yunus himself.

Instead, he positions himself as the caretaker of Bangladesh’s “greater stability”, while slowly making sure that his foothold becomes permanent. And for that to happen, he needs a support system. Not the one that comes from the people, but one that comes from power brokers radical groups at home, and influential friends abroad.

So why align with Pakistan, a country sinking in debt and disorder? What can Pakistan offer?

The answer is: China.

Pakistan today is not a power center; it’s a front office for Beijing’s South Asia desk. And through Islamabad, Yunus is knocking on Beijing’s door, offering something even China doesn’t currently have  a strategic outpost bang on India’s underbelly. He’s waving a flag that says: “Use me.”

Use Bangladesh as a gateway to India’s northeastern corridor. Use it to stir unrest, to build roadways, to float debt, to offer “aid.” And in exchange, all Yunus wants is the power to stay where he is unelected, unquestioned.

How do we know this isn’t conjecture?

Look at the sequence of decisions. Bangladesh under Yunus closed three land ports and suspended another with India, citing “infrastructure issues.” Curious timing, isn’t it?

Even more ironic is this, despite publicly escalating tensions with India, Bangladesh still went ahead and imported 50,000 tons of rice from India, costing over $21 million. What does this tell us?

It tells us that this isn’t strategy rooted in economics, it’s a political signaling exercise. He’s playing a game. And now the question becomes – What is Yunus truly plotting, and what plotlines is he rewriting?

One thread runs through Meghna Alam’s sudden arrest,  a story that hints at how deep this rot goes.

Meghna Alam, a former Miss Earth Bangladesh, dared to expose the extramarital involvement of the Saudi ambassador, a scandal made worse by the deeply conservative Islamic values both nations claim to uphold. But rather than defend her freedom of speech, the Yunus-led government sent the police in the dead of night to abduct her, a moment she streamed on Facebook Live. She was jailed under a draconian law, while the real scandal was buried under diplomatic protocol.

Why? Because upsetting Saudi Arabia isn’t on the cards  – oil flows through influence, and influence must be protected.

So what does this entire episode tell us?

That Yunus is not just consolidating power internally, he’s dancing to an external symphony, composed in Beijing, arranged in Islamabad, and sponsored by Riyadh.

Now let us come to geopolitics – key politics, power politics.

The recent appointment of Khalilur Rahman as Bangladesh’s National Security Advisor on 9th April 2025 was no small administrative reshuffle, it was a power play, loaded with signals, layered motives, and strategic implications. He was already Yunus’s point man on the Rohingya issue and Priority Affairs. With this new role, he now oversees both human rights diplomacy and national security.

But this appointment was made when Bangladesh’s Army Chief, Waker-Uz-Zaman, was away on a diplomatic visit to Russia and Croatia. It’s worth pausing right here. In countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan, the military doesn’t just guard borders, it holds significant sway in internal politics, sometimes more than the civilian government itself.

So, was Yunus trying to bypass the Army Chief? Undercut his authority? Sneak in his loyalist when the General wasn’t looking? That’s the question.

And the signals don’t stop there. Yunus has been openly flirting with China, while America, predictably, isn’t too thrilled. The US questions democracy, transparency, equal rights – China doesn’t care. China’s playbook is cold, hard, and transactional. So for Yunus, China is money, America is migration. And that’s exactly the game he seems to be playing.

Let’s dig deeper. Mohammed Yunus, in many ways, hails from a tradition of civil power-seekers with dictatorial leanings. Think of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, a man who wanted to be the head of a country, even if it meant breaking up another. Sound familiar?

Yunus too seems willing to burn the house down as long as he’s the one holding the fire extinguisher.

Now, here’s where it gets even more intriguing, Khalilur Rahman holds a US passport. That means the National Security Advisor of Bangladesh is technically an American citizen. Let that sink in. And not just him, 7 to 8 key people in the interim setup have foreign passports, mostly American or European.

So, is this a case of deep state influence from the US? Are these appointees strategically placed proxies meant to steer Bangladesh’s future? But if that’s true, why are they still hobnobbing with China?

The answer lies in dual strategy, the very same strategy that is now institutionalized in Pakistan.

Take Chinese money.
Blame America.
Send your children to study in America.
Buy property in London.
Settle in New Jersey.
Rinse and repeat.

None of these power players hold Chinese passports. So it’s clear, America is where they want to go, but China is where the money flows from.

Now back to the army. The Bangladesh Army is a proud, structured, and disciplined institution. It follows its Chief. But here’s the danger, if Yunus manages to topple Waker-Uz-Zaman, he gets to insert a loyalist, either a Chinese stooge or an American asset. And once that happens, he controls both the civilian narrative and the military doctrine.

In fact, a video has surfaced where the Chief of the National Citizen Party openly alleges that General Waker-Uz-Zaman did not support Yunus’s elevation as Chief Advisor. That one line tells us everything about the power struggle under the surface.

The Last Bit,  The Game of Thrones in Dhaka
Md Yunus is playing a complex geopolitical game, part survival, part ambition, part ideological war. He wants to be the indispensable man. The interim head of state, who turns temporary power into a permanent seat. A man who bypasses elections, co-opts radical forces like Jamaat-e-Islami, and now surrounds himself with foreign-passport-holding advisors, all while balancing between Beijing’s cheque book and Washington’s lecture notes.

He’s not just redefining Bangladesh’s internal politics.
He’s repositioning Bangladesh in the great global game of influence.
India must now watch Dhaka not just with interest, but with caution.
Because if Yunus succeeds, Bangladesh may become a frontline state, not for democracy, but for a new era of foreign-controlled proxy politics right on India’s eastern flank.

Hence, by the looks of it –

The stage is set.
The actors are in place.
And the drama in Dhaka has only just begun!